LYNCH·LLP
◈ FIND AN EXAMINER OR ART UNIT
◈ USPTO PATENT EXAMINER STATISTICS

Examiner Joshua Joo

TECH CENTER 2100 · 1 ART UNIT · 77 DECIDED APPLICATIONS · LAST ACTION OCT 2008
ALLOWANCE RATE = SHARE OF DECIDED APPLICATIONS (ALLOWED + ABANDONED); PENDING EXCLUDED
OVERALL ALLOWANCE RATE · POOLED ACROSS 1 ART UNIT

Examiner Joshua Joo has allowed 35 of 77 decided applications (45%) in Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security.

45% pooled allowance · benchmarked per art unit below
DATA UPDATED JUNE 25, 2026
// READING THIS EXAMINER

What the data says.

Joshua Joo maintains a public record in Technology Center 2100 (Computer Architecture, Software, and Information Security). Across 77 disposed applications, he allowed 35 and 42 were abandoned, yielding an allowance rate of 45% over the decided count. His record spans a single art unit. This pooled figure describes his past disposition of applications in this technology center and does not predict outcomes in any specific case. The allowance rate reflects historical data only.

// HOW TO READ THESE NUMBERS

How to read these numbers.

This pooled record aggregates all applications decided across Examiner Joo's art units within TC 2100. The 45% allowance rate is calculated from decided applications (allowed plus abandoned) and represents his historical record. Pooled figures do not isolate performance by individual art unit and are correlational snapshots of past activity—they are not predictive of any single application's outcome.

These are aggregate statistics from this examiner's past public record — not predictions about any specific application. The per-art-unit figures below show how the record varies across art units. Our approach to patent prosecution →

// BY ART UNIT

The record, art unit by art unit.

Each section benchmarks this examiner against that art unit's average. Figures are this examiner's own public record within the art unit; the overall rate above pools them.

◈ PRIMARY · ART UNIT 2154
77 APPS · 45% ALLOWANCE

Primarily examines information retrieval and database structures.

45% allowance (of decided)▏ art-unit average 58%
DISPOSITION35 / 42 / 0allowed / abandoned / pending
FIRST ACTION40.3 moart unit avg 27.1 mo
TOTAL PENDENCY63.2 moart unit avg 41.9 mo
// INTERVIEW SPLIT

Allowance rate for applications with an examiner interview versus without one.

WITH INTERVIEW90%allowance share
WITHOUT INTERVIEW29%+61 pt difference

A correlation, not proof that interviews cause allowances. Based on 21 decided applications with an interview and 56 without.

// FAQ

Questions about Examiner Joshua Joo

  • What is Joshua Joo's overall allowance rate?
    45% across 77 disposed applications in TC 2100.
  • How many art units does this record cover?
    One art unit (2154) within Technology Center 2100.
  • What do these figures mean for my application?
    This pooled record describes past dispositions. Historical allowance rates are not predictions of outcomes in any specific case and do not account for application-specific facts or prosecution history.
◈ RESPONDING TO AN OFFICE ACTION

Strategy, not paperwork. Talk to the attorney doing the work.

Lynch LLP represents applicants in patent prosecution before the USPTO. Book a consultation to discuss your matter with the attorney who would handle it.

Book a 30-minute consultation →
METHODOLOGY & DISCLOSURES

Methodology. This page pools every art unit in which Examiner Joshua Joo has a public record within Technology Center 2100. Statistics are computed from publicly available USPTO records, refreshed on a recurring schedule. This page's data was last updated June 25, 2026. The overall allowance rate is total allowed divided by total decided applications (allowed plus abandoned) across all art units — not an average of the per-art-unit rates; pending applications are excluded. Figures are rounded for display. Pooled sample: 77 applications.

Lynch LLP is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Examiner statistics are derived from publicly available USPTO data.

These statistics describe past examiner behavior and do not predict the outcome of any particular application. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes. Where this page compares an examiner's allowance rate to an art-unit average, that comparison is a factual description of the public record, not a characterization of any individual examiner's conduct or competence.

This page is for general informational purposes and is not legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is formed by viewing it. Full disclaimers →

ATTORNEY ADVERTISING — Sean Lynch, Partner, Lynch LLP